Proposal: Henrique at 50% and Vatrano to NYR

[lwvs84]

Are the Ducks at the point where they even need to trade Vatrano/Henrique? Don't they have a pretty full prospect cupboard?

Seems like they might just keep Vatrano and try and re-sign Henrique to me as an outsider.

Edit: Silfverberg however seems like a lock to be moved.

Ducks could probably use one or two more Winger prospects (specifically on the right side) and maybe another high end, defensive RD. Aside from that, the rest of the system looks good

 

[Raspewtin]

If NYR re-acquired him now, would he be targeted for the first line? With the current roster, seems not.

At the TDL, a true first line player (even a rental) is going to fetch a pretty big haul. More than a first round pick +. The question is what is the market for a solid middle six guy with a great contract - that is Vatrano.

He definitely would. He played with Kreider and ZIb his last stint here and we have the worst RW depth in the league.

 

[lakeshirts37]

I wouldn't do this trade for Vatrano by himself, let alone both him and Henrique. Jones does nothing for us and while Berard is a fine prospect, he is almost certainly too small for our GM to covet him.

Ducks would absolutely make this trade for just Vatrano…they take that 1st rounder all day the rest is gravy

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I think you are significantly undervaluing Vatrano, even if you view this year as an outlier. He's a proven middle six forward who can play on both the the penalty kill and power play (second unit), with a strong playoff track record. And its not just the production - he has a phenomenal contract for a guy in his prime who brings those elements.

If he's traded, he'll very likely get a first (or premium prospect) with at least one additional good piece. Otherwise, the ducks can just keep him and trade him in the off season or next trade deadline.



He's not a first line player. That being said, he had 13 points in 20 playoff games (5,8). Seems pretty noticeable to me.

He also brings a bit of the pest/sand paper factor which is a good thing in the playoffs.

I don't think our valuations are that far apart. I'm saying later first with a decent prospect, you are saying later first and a more significant prospect or young player. We are at least in agreement that the Ducks shouldn't be moving him at this deadline unless the return is equivalent to a first plus more.

 

[bernmeister]

Curious what itd take to get this done. Plugs 2 big holes for NYR.

Would something like the below get it done?

1st round pick
Zac Jones (immediate plug and play bottom pair offensive minded dman)
Brett Berard

good for Rs, bad for Ds

 

[bernmeister]

ANA needs Ws, keeps Vats

Othmann + Berard + BMB + Pajuniemi + Goodrow retained 1.6x to 2.0 + nyr 4th
for
Zegras + Helleson + ANA 2nd

Ber ok for cup of coffee. Paj ready to get full scrutiny now, can show what he has for bottom 6.RW -- both those guys righty shots
Oth can be tested now,
BMB = promising F, yr + in our system can project ready to compete for Strome spot in 1-2 yrs
Good at 2 has value

Z out w/broken ankle 2 months
Ducks have no reason to sell him now, BUT if it looks like he goes east once he can as ufa, ANA may get more going this way now while he has more as opposed to less term later

Helleson is ok b'c ANA has D surplus

 

[lwvs84]

ANA needs Ws, keeps Vats

Othmann + Berard + BMB + Pajuniemi + Goodrow retained 1.6x to 2.0 + nyr 4th
for
Zegras + Helleson + ANA 2nd

Ber ok for cup of coffee. Paj ready to get full scrutiny now, can show what he has for bottom 6.RW -- both those guys righty shots
Oth can be tested now,
BMB = promising F, yr + in our system can project ready to compete for Strome spot in 1-2 yrs
Good at 2 has value

Z out w/broken ankle 2 months
Ducks have no reason to sell him now, BUT if it looks like he goes east once he can as ufa, ANA may get more going this way now while he has more as opposed to less term later

Helleson is ok b'c ANA has D surplus

Ducks needs are scoring and big, physical shutdown RD. IF Zegras is moved, it'll be as part of a package for an upgrade, not where the package is coming back.

Berard is not a guy the Ducks would target at all. Undersized LHD is the last thing they need. Fowler (short term) with Minty, Zellweger, Hinds, Vaakanainen, LaCombe are all LHD (4 of which have shown they can play at the NHL level already). 0 added value there for the Ducks.

Goodrow is also 0 added value (at best, probably negative value for the Ducks). The bottom 6 is pretty crowded and there are prospects that will be ready before his contract is up.

Downgrading from a high 2nd round pick to a low 4th round pick, so moving back over 2.5 rounds.

Helleson is probably going to top out as a #6/7 guy, so no real loss there. Every system probably has one.

2 bottom 6 forwards (again, the Ducks have a bunch of those and more coming up) and Othmann who's promising but unproven for Zegras (best player in the deal) and a high second round pick (best pick). It really doesn't look at what the Ducks needs are. IF he is going to bolt at the end of his contract, the Ducks could do significantly better, but he's an RFA at the end of his current deal so there is still a lot of years of team control. The earliest the Ducks might deal him is at the draft if they win #1 overall (both have next to no chance of happening).

 

[Rec T]

Ducks...

I was going to mock bern for ignoring the two names in the thread's title and his focus on the one player that the Ducks have never mentioned even the possibility of moving on from (Z) and then break down his silliness ... thanks for saving me a bunch of typing.

 

[bernmeister]

Ducks needs are scoring and big, physical shutdown RD. IF Zegras is moved, it'll be as part of a package for an upgrade, not where the package is coming back.

Berard is not a guy the Ducks would target at all. Undersized LHD is the last thing they need. Fowler (short term) with Minty, Zellweger, Hinds, Vaakanainen, LaCombe are all LHD (4 of which have shown they can play at the NHL level already). 0 added value there for the Ducks.

Goodrow is also 0 added value (at best, probably negative value for the Ducks). The bottom 6 is pretty crowded and there are prospects that will be ready before his contract is up.

Downgrading from a high 2nd round pick to a low 4th round pick, so moving back over 2.5 rounds.

Helleson is probably going to top out as a #6/7 guy, so no real loss there. Every system probably has one.

2 bottom 6 forwards (again, the Ducks have a bunch of those and more coming up) and Othmann who's promising but unproven for Zegras (best player in the deal) and a high second round pick (best pick). It really doesn't look at what the Ducks needs are. IF he is going to bolt at the end of his contract, the Ducks could do significantly better, but he's an RFA at the end of his current deal so there is still a lot of years of team control. The earliest the Ducks might deal him is at the draft if they win #1 overall (both have next to no chance of happening).

Berard is rhs RW, not LW. He is undersized.
I valued Berard and Helleson as comparables.

Disagree on Goodrow reduced almost half down to 2.0 per. At full pop yes he's overpaid, but has value at 2.0
Don't view him as significant piece here, more of a useful add.
You are getting an immediate C while Z is out. If you consider to deal Henrique or Strome, Goodrow helps.

Paj also min and a throw in. He is mid 20s and will not crack Rs lineup and is a freebie to you for balance of yr.

Main thing is Zeg who is no longer elc, for Othmann who is beginning elc
I agree there is some risk, but I don't believe it is night and day dif. I want here b'c Rs need pivots, Ds need Ws, so hence a match.

Like I said, the longer you hold him, the less his value if as some believe he wants back east, which limits your options for destinations of suitors. That should not be an immediate cause for alarm. But Rs effed up w/Buchnevich, held on to him til there was a sliver of rfa value left, and got bupkis for him.

I would consider reasonable add but in total deal is win win.

You are entitled to best return, and whether or not/who might offer more/better is another story remains to be seen.


thanks for constructive feedback, agree or disagree

 

[bernmeister]

I was going to mock bern for ignoring the two names in the thread's title and his focus on the one player that the Ducks have never mentioned even the possibility of moving on from (Z) and then break down his silliness ... thanks for saving me a bunch of typing.

be careful
those who live by the mock die by the mock

I did not ignore the names.
I merely took care not to be verbose and repeat myself unnecessarily.

I explicitly said Ducks should keep Vats
It is understood/inferred that adding Good at 2 provides a stopgap if Henrique or Strome are moved.

 

[quackquackquack]

LOL about what I expected for 2 Ducks that would be at the top of the trade target board for every contender. This is laughable.

 

[Rec T]

be careful
those who live by the mock die by the mock

I did not ignore the names.
I merely took care not to be verbose and repeat myself unnecessarily.

I explicitly said Ducks should keep Vats
It is understood/inferred that adding Good at 2 provides a stopgap if Henrique or Strome are moved.

lwvs84 broke things down quite well. Your proposal was 'bad' for the Ducks. A pile of players they don't need/want for a player (Z) that they never have indicated that they have any interest in moving. Could he be available, sure anyone is but the price has to be something that you can't turn down. The vaunted 'hockey trade' in other words. And if you're the party going to the Ducks wanting him, you have to make it irresistible for them, not a bunch of miscellaneous pieces that more or less add up to what the contracts/expected ability go for. You were far from that.

In your reply to lw... you said "You are getting an immediate C while Z is out. If you consider to deal Henrique or Strome, Goodrow helps." Maybe so, but Z has been a winger pretty much all year. Sure he has the ability to step in as C, but that's not where he's playing (when healthy). With Carlsson, MacT, & Lundestrom as the top three line centers, Goodrow isn't needed there. So again, not what's needed & not good for that other coastal team.

Anyway, have a good evening.

 

[bernmeister]

lwvs84 broke things down quite well. Your proposal was 'bad' for the Ducks. A pile of players they don't need/want for a player (Z) that they never have indicated that they have any interest in moving. Could he be available, sure anyone is but the price has to be something that you can't turn down. The vaunted 'hockey trade' in other words. And if you're the party going to the Ducks wanting him, you have to make it irresistible for them, not a bunch of miscellaneous pieces that more or less add up to what the contracts/expected ability go for. You were far from that.

In your reply to lw... you said "You are getting an immediate C while Z is out. If you consider to deal Henrique or Strome, Goodrow helps." Maybe so, but Z has been a winger pretty much all year. Sure he has the ability to step in as C, but that's not where he's playing (when healthy). With Carlsson, MacT, & Lundestrom as the top three line centers, Goodrow isn't needed there. So again, not what's needed & not good for that other coastal team.

Anyway, have a good evening.

agree to disagree on some details, but the cordial, civil, constructive exchange is welcomed

peace out
bern

 

[One Winged Angel]

@Amazing Kreiderman, you broke down the cap to me on Twitter.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

@Amazing Kreiderman, you broke down the cap to me on Twitter.

So the cap situation is as follows:

- 4.4m LTI pool

This is the Chytil contract which is on LTIR. With Chytil out for the season, that 4.4m is guaranteed space they can use.

- ~800k for a player that the deadline acquisition will replace.

If you add Henrique, another player comes out of the line-up. Brodzinski or Pitlick. Let's take Pitlick as an example. $787,500 cap hit to add to the 4.4m theoretically

- Max $800,000 projected ACLS

Now, this is where it gets tricky. The projection as of now, is that the Rangers will have $800,000 pro-rated ACSL (Accruable Cap Space Limit). This essentially is the money you save up on a daily basis every day you are under your cap limit.

Let's say you are running an ice-cream stand for 8 weeks, and you get a budget of 20 dollars a day to run it. You spend that money on cones, electricity to run your freezer, purchase whipped cream, spoons, cups etc. This all costs you $19,75 a day. You save 25 cents every day.

Scenario 1 (2021-22):
After 6 weeks, you have saved $7,50 total. And with 10 days to go, that means your new limit (ACSL) is now $10,75 per day until the end of the season. Great! You can use that extra money to purchase some sprinkles (7th D man), or some chocolate dip (Top-6 RW)! Because you can afford it.

This is what we did in 2022. We saved up so much, that we could even afford a slush puppy station (Andrew Copp)!

Scenario 2 (2023-24):
After 6 weeks, and having saved up $7,50 in total, your freezer (Chytil) is on the fritz! Running the freezer costs you 5 dollars a day. Oh boy. Now what? You have that extra money saved up but that's not enough to replace your freezer! But you can put your freezer on LTIR. And your parents promise to pay for the new freezer. However, they do expect you to first spend your savings (ACSL) on the new freezer, and they cover the rest.

Now your ACSL is gone. But your new freezer which replaces your old freezer (Chytil) is covered by your parents. But you no longer have those savings to get those sprinkles and chocolate dip anymore. You can go for a cheaper model (Thomas Novak) so you have extra money from your parents' contributions to also get some rainbow cookies to hand out (Duclair) or you spend all that money on a more expensive freezer (Henrique) to ensure the quality of your ice cream remains the same

Right now, the Rangers are dealing with scenario 2.

Your accrued cap space remains available as long as you stay under your ACSL. The Rangers are under the ACSL with 21 players on the roster. But the moment they call up a 22nd (to be the 13th forward, or the 8th defenseman during Trouba's suspension), that money will first come out of the accrued cap you have built up. It evaporates quickly if you only have marginal savings like the Rangers.

Then there's the situation we were in last year, where we did not have cap space to recall short-term replacements for day-to-day injuries, resulting in us playing shorthanded, only 17 skaters. Drury does not want that situation again. It's highly unlikely he spends all the way up to the cap with just a 21-man roster.

So, to summarize:

- $4.4m guaranteed LTI pool
- $787,500 from sending down Pitlick

That's 5.1m guaranteed.

Then an additional max of $800,000 in ACSL (Which is unlikely) would give us 5.9m to use in total. Knowing Drury will at least keep $800,000 in cap space for emergency recalls (remember, emergency recalls still count against the cap, only Roster Emergency Exemptions don't, but you need to play at least 1 game with 17 skaters before you're eligible for that).

The reason I stick to 4.4m as the number to spend, is because I do not expect us to stay under our ACSL for the next 5 weeks, nor do I think Drury spends up to the cap including LTI after the experiences from last year.

4.4m in useable cap space at the deadline is the most realistic number.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Berard is rhs RW, not LW. He is undersized.

 

[McJedi]

Curious what itd take to get this done. Plugs 2 big holes for NYR.

Would something like the below get it done?

1st round pick
Zac Jones (immediate plug and play bottom pair offensive minded dman)
Brett Berard

Awful for the Ducks. Very easy no.

 

[bernmeister]

So the cap situation is as follows:

- 4.4m LTI pool

This is the Chytil contract which is on LTIR. With Chytil out for the season, that 4.4m is guaranteed space they can use.

- ~800k for a player that the deadline acquisition will replace.

If you add Henrique, another player comes out of the line-up. Brodzinski or Pitlick. Let's take Pitlick as an example. $787,500 cap hit to add to the 4.4m theoretically

- Max $800,000 projected ACLS

Now, this is where it gets tricky. The projection as of now, is that the Rangers will have $800,000 pro-rated ACSL (Accruable Cap Space Limit). This essentially is the money you save up on a daily basis every day you are under your cap limit.

Let's say you are running an ice-cream stand for 8 weeks, and you get a budget of 20 dollars a day to run it. You spend that money on cones, electricity to run your freezer, purchase whipped cream, spoons, cups etc. This all costs you $19,75 a day. You save 25 cents every day.

Scenario 1 (2021-22):
After 6 weeks, you have saved $7,50 total. And with 10 days to go, that means your new limit (ACSL) is now $10,75 per day until the end of the season. Great! You can use that extra money to purchase some sprinkles (7th D man), or some chocolate dip (Top-6 RW)! Because you can afford it.

This is what we did in 2022. We saved up so much, that we could even afford a slush puppy station (Andrew Copp)!

Scenario 2 (2023-24):
After 6 weeks, and having saved up $7,50 in total, your freezer (Chytil) is on the fritz! Running the freezer costs you 5 dollars a day. Oh boy. Now what? You have that extra money saved up but that's not enough to replace your freezer! But you can put your freezer on LTIR. And your parents promise to pay for the new freezer. However, they do expect you to first spend your savings (ACSL) on the new freezer, and they cover the rest.

Now your ACSL is gone. But your new freezer which replaces your old freezer (Chytil) is covered by your parents. But you no longer have those savings to get those sprinkles and chocolate dip anymore. You can go for a cheaper model (Thomas Novak) so you have extra money from your parents' contributions to also get some rainbow cookies to hand out (Duclair) or you spend all that money on a more expensive freezer (Henrique) to ensure the quality of your ice cream remains the same

Right now, the Rangers are dealing with scenario 2.

Your accrued cap space remains available as long as you stay under your ACSL. The Rangers are under the ACSL with 21 players on the roster. But the moment they call up a 22nd (to be the 13th forward, or the 8th defenseman during Trouba's suspension), that money will first come out of the accrued cap you have built up. It evaporates quickly if you only have marginal savings like the Rangers.

Then there's the situation we were in last year, where we did not have cap space to recall short-term replacements for day-to-day injuries, resulting in us playing shorthanded, only 17 skaters. Drury does not want that situation again. It's highly unlikely he spends all the way up to the cap with just a 21-man roster.

So, to summarize:

- $4.4m guaranteed LTI pool
- $787,500 from sending down Pitlick

That's 5.1m guaranteed.

Then an additional max of $800,000 in ACSL (Which is unlikely) would give us 5.9m to use in total. Knowing Drury will at least keep $800,000 in cap space for emergency recalls (remember, emergency recalls still count against the cap, only Roster Emergency Exemptions don't, but you need to play at least 1 game with 17 skaters before you're eligible for that).

The reason I stick to 4.4m as the number to spend, is because I do not expect us to stay under our ACSL for the next 5 weeks, nor do I think Drury spends up to the cap including LTI after the experiences from last year.

4.4m in useable cap space at the deadline is the most realistic number.

thank you

View attachment 813783
View attachment 813784
View attachment 813785

the old man had a brain fart!
I stand corrected
it is lefty, LW